I find Riccardo B's #4859 a pretty cryptic post. He wrote (snip):
> In my view, most of Ajits points
> are quite sound, because they refer to the extortion of living
> labour in the valorization process from wage labour as commanded
> by money capital.
I also find some Ajit's insights very interesting. But here we are
discussing an specific point: Ajit says that it is possible to study
Marx's theory of value without "exploring the question of the theory
of money". Do you think that such task is possible or reasonable?
> That is: it is simply not true that if we study the valorization
> process before final exchange on the commodity market we forget
> the link between money and value.
Could you please explain? Who does say that this is "true"?
> While if we collapses (the creation of value in)
> production and (the actualization of value) in circulation we get in
> trouble.
I "got in trouble" reading this!! What do you mean? What are you
speaking about? Could you refer to some particular author that
"collapses" creation of value in production and "collapses" the
actualization of value in circulation? What is this!!
Saluti compagno
Alejandro R.